Re: Use of XML for config files

[Stephen Leake <stephen_leake@acm.org>]

Volkert Barr <barr@cs.tu-berlin.de> writes:

> Yes XML can help here, but the most projects i have seen, XML was a
> complete 
> overkill! 

You really should look at the implemenation of Glib.XML. Get it from
the GtkAda distribution at http://libre.act-europe.fr/GtkAda/

It's _one_ Ada package; the body file is 671 lines long. I don't think
that's overkill for anything!

> Don't forget, that a syntax definition the XML files is necessary

Nope; we can ignore it, because we've got very simple requirements.
However, if you want it for your app, you can add it.

> and parsing/navigation/errorhandling is still your problem!

This should all be covered by the Config Files API. Please check the
draft spec when I post it to make sure I haven't missed something.

> I believe, a simple Package/Key/Value Style works well for most
> problems.

And XML is a simple way to represent that style.

> And today, XMLAda based on the GNAT Spitbol package and is not
> compiler independent! But compiler independence should be an
> requirement for the Configuration Packages! 

Certainly the API and file format should be compiler and OS
independent. But any particular implementation is free to be compiler
dependent. If enough people don't like that, they'll produce another
implementation.

It is not true that all XML implementations will be GNAT dependent!
Glib.XML is not. There are many C implementations that could be
imported. 

> If there is a consensus that XML is needed, the Spitbowl Package
> must be ported!

No. People who don't want to use GNAT must find another XML package.

-- 
-- Stephe